CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

gc-mail

Sending and reading messages between agents

60

Quality

70%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./internal/bootstrap/packs/core/skills/gc-mail/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

86%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is an efficient, fully executable command reference with clear categorical organization and no unnecessary padding; its only gap is the absence of any validation/caution around destructive commands like delete.

Suggestions

Add a brief caution or confirmation step for destructive/batch commands, e.g. noting that 'gc mail delete <id>' is irreversible and should be confirmed before running.

Optionally clarify the hook usage of 'gc mail check' with a one-line example so the Managing section's intent is unambiguous.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly lean command listings with inline comments; the two-sentence bead-store intro is slightly more than needed but earns its place as non-obvious domain context, sitting above the 3 anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

Every entry is an executable gc command with real flags and placeholders, copy-paste ready and covering send/reply/read/inbox/thread/archive/delete cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Commands are clearly grouped into Sending/Reading/Managing sections with unambiguous usage, but no validation or caution is given for destructive operations like delete, keeping it below 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with no external references needed; the well-organized section headers fully satisfy the simple-skill exception for progressive disclosure.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

53%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is concise and names a clear niche plus two concrete actions, but it omits any trigger/usage guidance and lacks synonyms like mail or inbox, capping completeness and trigger quality at 3.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause stating when to invoke the skill, e.g. 'Use when an agent needs to send, reply to, or read mail/messages from other agents.'

Include natural synonyms and concrete verbs to broaden trigger coverage, e.g. 'Sending, replying, and reading mail (messages) between agents, including inbox, threads, and archiving.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('messages between agents') with two concrete actions ('Sending and reading'), matching the 1-2 concrete actions anchor; not comprehensive enough for 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

Has a clear 'what' (sending and reading messages) but no 'when'/'Use when...' clause, so per the guideline completeness is capped at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'messages' and 'agents' are relevant natural terms, but common variations like mail, inbox, or reply are absent, matching the missing-synonyms anchor.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Inter-agent messaging is a clear niche with minimal conflict risk; only minor overlap with general notification/communication skills, so above the 3 anchor.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
crypt0nerd1/gascity
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.